Laserfiche WebLink
216 Specific to a rebate program, Chair Cihacek stated he was supportive of it unless it <br />217 cost the city too much to implement compared to the benefits received; and if <br />218 amortized on water bills, asked if it could be paid back over time unless receiving <br />219 grant funds. Chair Cihacek stated he was fine applying for a grant as a pilot <br />220 program, but only if the customer was interested in purchasing and paying back the <br />221 city's initial cost over time. <br />222 <br />223 Member Seigler stated that the city should monitor itself on irrigation systems on <br />224 city -owned property. Member Seigler opined there was nothing more <br />225 disconcerting than observing irrigation systems running on city property when it <br />226 was raining out. Member Seigler suggested as an educational point, the city show <br />227 cost savings realized for taxpayers by monitoring those systems. <br />228 <br />229 Mr. Culver agreed that the city should certainly lead by example. Mr. Culver noted <br />230 the city also had a lot of city water usage not currently metered; and advised that <br />231 was one recommendation staff would make for the city to expend money to install <br />232 meters on its own sprinkler systems in city parks and other city -owned properties <br />233 if not currently metered to allow a record of how ch water was being used and <br />234 to hold the city more accountable. Mr. Culver admitted this was a good point and <br />235 a reality for the city to spend funds to lead by example and better manage city water <br />236 usage. <br />237 <br />238 Member Wozniak concurred, noting that was a great idea and served as a good <br />239 starting point for the city's educational program for residents in talking about the <br />240 steps taken by the city to restrict or limit irrigation use and landscaping; and set the <br />241 stage for the long-term view of the cost of water historically from 1980, 1990 and <br />242 what it may look like in 2030. Member Wozniak suggested this would incentivize <br />243 residents to take steps now before water usage reaches that higher cost; and noting <br />244 this is the city is doing — as well as other municipalities. Member Wozniak <br />245 uggested also solicit feedback from residents. <br />246 <br />247 Member Heimerl also suggested that city staff review city code related to applying <br />248 code to minimize irrigation people are currently doing, and ways through <br />249 landscaping technologies and types of plantings that could further minimize water <br />250 usages. Member Heimerl suggested the city take the lead, through example and <br />251 education, through code changes and changing community views of what is good <br />252 vegetation for yards beyond weed overgrowth but as an alternative to typical lawns, <br />253 moving away from the 1950's pristine yard. Member Heimerl opined the education <br />254 process could include what needs to be cut and/or irrigated, and the opportunities <br />255 for plantings to reduce the need to sprinkler. <br />256 <br />257 In conclusion, Mr. Culver duly noted the PWETC's recommendation to the City <br />258 Council the use of emerging technologies and educational opportunities to reduce <br />259 watering in the community, utilizing some of the ideas brought forward during <br />260 tonight's discussion. <br />261 <br />Page 6 of 17 <br />